t they can drag on sometimes.
>
>
> > Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2016 11:31:37 -0700
> > Subject: Re: [VOTE] KIP-51 - List Connectors REST API
> > From: wangg...@gmail.com
> > To: dev@kafka.apache.org
> >
> > +1.
> >
> &
+1 (non-binding)
+1 for re-evaluating the KIP process. This one went through very quickly, but
they can drag on sometimes.
> Date: Wed, 23 Mar 2016 11:31:37 -0700
> Subject: Re: [VOTE] KIP-51 - List Connectors REST API
> From: wangg...@gmail
+1.
On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 10:24 AM, Ashish Singh wrote:
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 10:00 AM, Gwen Shapira wrote:
>
> > Very large +1 on re-evaluating the KIP process.
> >
> > I was hoping we can do a meta-kip meeting after the release (Maybe even
> > in-person at Kafka Sum
+1 (non-binding)
On Wed, Mar 23, 2016 at 10:00 AM, Gwen Shapira wrote:
> Very large +1 on re-evaluating the KIP process.
>
> I was hoping we can do a meta-kip meeting after the release (Maybe even
> in-person at Kafka Summit?) to discuss.
>
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 7:59 PM, Grant Henke wrote:
Very large +1 on re-evaluating the KIP process.
I was hoping we can do a meta-kip meeting after the release (Maybe even
in-person at Kafka Summit?) to discuss.
On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 7:59 PM, Grant Henke wrote:
> +1 (non-binding)
>
> I am also a +1 to evaluating the KIP process and ways to mak
+1 (non-binding)
Ismael
On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 10:46 PM, Ewen Cheslack-Postava
wrote:
> Since it's pretty minimal, we'd like to squeeze it into 0.10 if possible,
> and VOTE threads take 3 days, it was suggested it might make sense to just
> kick off voting on this KIP immediately (and restart
+1 (non-binding)
I am also a +1 to evaluating the KIP process and ways to make it more
effective and streamlined.
On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 6:04 PM, Neha Narkhede wrote:
> +1 (binding)
>
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 3:56 PM, Liquan Pei wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 3:54 PM, Gwen S
+1 (binding)
On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 3:56 PM, Liquan Pei wrote:
> +1
>
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 3:54 PM, Gwen Shapira wrote:
>
> > +1
> >
> > Straight forward enough and can't possibly break anything.
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 3:46 PM, Ewen Cheslack-Postava <
> e...@confluent.io>
> > wro
+1
On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 3:54 PM, Gwen Shapira wrote:
> +1
>
> Straight forward enough and can't possibly break anything.
>
> On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 3:46 PM, Ewen Cheslack-Postava
> wrote:
>
> > Since it's pretty minimal, we'd like to squeeze it into 0.10 if possible,
> > and VOTE threads ta
+1
Straight forward enough and can't possibly break anything.
On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 3:46 PM, Ewen Cheslack-Postava
wrote:
> Since it's pretty minimal, we'd like to squeeze it into 0.10 if possible,
> and VOTE threads take 3 days, it was suggested it might make sense to just
> kick off voting
+1 (non-binding)
On Tue, Mar 22, 2016 at 3:46 PM, Ewen Cheslack-Postava
wrote:
> Since it's pretty minimal, we'd like to squeeze it into 0.10 if possible,
> and VOTE threads take 3 days, it was suggested it might make sense to just
> kick off voting on this KIP immediately (and restart it if som
Since it's pretty minimal, we'd like to squeeze it into 0.10 if possible,
and VOTE threads take 3 days, it was suggested it might make sense to just
kick off voting on this KIP immediately (and restart it if someone raises
an issue). Feel free to object and comment in the DISCUSS thread if you
feel
12 matches
Mail list logo
